If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Breeders take note

In the GSD breed notes in a recent copy of Our Dogs, the writer quoted an article written by the geneticist Malcolm Willis 30 years ago, which seems very relevant to breeders today:

‘You, the breeders, sell puppies; however, the law considers that you sell goods. If you sell genetically defective goods then the buyer has a case against you and can bring it to the civil courts. Anyone who breeds dogs of whatever breed can turn out defective stock; there is no crime in that. The crime lies in selling such stock to the unsuspecting public and not caring enough to try to prevent the problem occurring in the first place and recurring. If you do not check eyes in a breed with eye troubles or examine hips in a breed with hip trouble etc, etc, then you do not merit being called a breeder and I do not care how many champions you have bred! You are a potential danger to the breed of dog you profess to love and you are thinking more of your pocket or your prestige or your power and influence than your breed.’

The breed notes writer added: ‘[DNA testing] is pretty meaningless if you test but take no notice of the results. So I would add to Malcolm’s description of where the crime lies – it lies in turning out genetically defective goods deliberately; and in relation to not doing enough to prevent the problem recurring I would add that this is a distinct possibility in future generations when breeding in the present day from carriers or affected dogs. . . it is a serious issue that should make breeders re-think their position.’

I think (and hope) ultimately that, given the many problems in purebred dogs, certain breed tests will be required of anyone breeding dogs and a 'defective goods' type law will enable the puppy buyer of a dog that ends up with genetic problems, to have costs covered or contributed to by the breeder IF the breeder cannot show formal certs that indicate they tested both parents for the condition and that dogs' results fit within breeding protocols, showing breeders therefore did their best to prevent genetic health problems.

Such a law would quickly stem backyard breeding and puppy farmers, and would focus minds on testing (so at least breeders would be making informed breeding decisions).

It would be wonderful if breeders would think of it as a liability NOT to breed to current protocols. I wish puppy buyers could/would bring civil suits in cases where genetic problems turn up. Hmmmmm this really gets the wheels turning.

Melissa
"If you don't own a dog, at least one, there is not necessarily anything wrong with you, but there may be something wrong with your life."
-Roger Caras

It would be wonderful if breeders would think of it as a liability NOT to breed to current protocols. I wish puppy buyers could/would bring civil suits in cases where genetic problems turn up. Hmmmmm this really gets the wheels turning.

In the UK there is strong evidence that some of the best known breeders have not bred to the current health protocols for years

More and more pet owners are coming forward with cavaliers that have SM, MVD and other hereditary conditions that have been bred by well known breeders who consistently ignored Cavalier Club codes of ethics and breed guidelines. These owners are angry that they have been duped into believing they were buying from responsible breeders. They are now coming forward and finding out there is plenty of evidence that shows they are not alone. Someday soon someone will be angry enough and wealthy enough to sue.

In fact it is possibly happening already.

There is so many SM affected Cavaliers coming to light that it sometimes seems to me that the next Fund to be set up should be one that helps less affluent owners take careless breeders to Court.

Margaret C

Cavaliers......Faith, The Ginger Tank and Woody.
Japanese Chins.... Dandy, Benny, Bridgette and Hana.
Remembered with love......... Tommy Tuppence and Fonzi

In the UK there is strong evidence that some of the best known breeders have not bred to the current health protocols for years

Change UK for US, you get the same. And is it really a surprise? Every show/hobby breeder I know breeds earlier than 2 1/2 years and some breed as early as 9 months from a nice potential stud. This is where the buyer must be informed and ask the hard questions before they buy. Pedigree information is just as important as parents. Buyer should find out health on grandparents and great grand parents as well. Sometimes not so easy to find the information if the parent is an import but the breeder should have some idea.

After my first cavalier died suddenly at three I didn't want to go through that heart ache again. I made sure before I bought my boy that I knew heart history in his pedigree. I am pleased to say he has great-greats that are alive and heart clear into their teens. Unfortunately I have no information about SM in his lines but I am hopeful no news is good news.

This is where the buyer must be informed and ask the hard questions before they buy.

Yes an excellent point, and so very true.

I think we are increasingly close to seeing a case against a breeder who has not properly tested nor followed recommended breeding protocols and produced -- surprise -- dogs that got early onset, serious heart disease or SM. IF someone is testing and using dogs carefully and waiting -- with these progressive diseases where waiting should be a top priority! -- to breed until at least 2.5 years old, then they would have no liability. But before long, a judge is going to create case law that establishes breeders have a case -- and costs -- to answer for if tests are available, especially when they are recommended *by their own national clubs* as well as their club medical advisors and international expert panels, and yet they breed flouting both tests and protocols and produce affected dogs.

Once case law is established in one country, it can be used internationally to help argue a case.

There are nonetheless many good breeders out there who must be so sick of dealing with the attitudes of so many of their colleagues.

especially when they are recommended *by their own national clubs* as well as their club medical advisors and international expert panels, and yet they breed flouting both tests and protocols and produce affected dogs.

And this to me is down right disgusting!!!!!!!!!!! These breed clubs SHOULD be the front lines for doing the right and just things for these dogs. Instead there in more acclaim and money involved in the outside looks of these dogs. People who claim to be animal lovers are the demise of the breeds they say they "love". Its like the PETA organization holding a company pig roast!

Yes, there are good breeders out there thanks heavens for that. Wish more "breeding loving" people were out there tho

Melissa
"If you don't own a dog, at least one, there is not necessarily anything wrong with you, but there may be something wrong with your life."
-Roger Caras

In the UK there is strong evidence that some of the best known breeders have not bred to the current health protocols for years

More and more pet owners are coming forward with cavaliers that have SM, MVD and other hereditary conditions that have been bred by well known breeders who consistently ignored Cavalier Club codes of ethics and breed guidelines. These owners are angry that they have been duped into believing they were buying from responsible breeders. They are now coming forward and finding out there is plenty of evidence that shows they are not alone.

Nowadays there are other ways for owners of SM affected dogs to show their anger. Freddie is only 18 months old.

The age of some of these SM affected dogs is very sad. I have heard SM is progressive so I am guessing surgery is the best option for these younger dogs?

Surgery is often recommended for these extreme young cases, although it does not reverse the damage already done within the spine, so most of the dogs still need pain medication. In many cases the operation will only buy a little extra time.

The most heartbreaking scenario is when the owners do not have insurance, so even paying for the initial consultation and MRI is nigh on impossible. SM is an expensive condition to diagnose and manage.

Margaret C

Cavaliers......Faith, The Ginger Tank and Woody.
Japanese Chins.... Dandy, Benny, Bridgette and Hana.
Remembered with love......... Tommy Tuppence and Fonzi